Re: Woods And Water, anyone read it Yet? -- United Hunters of Florida (UHF)

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

04/26/24 10:17:59pm [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 07/15/08 9:20:20am
Author: Casey
Subject: Re: Woods And Water, anyone read it Yet?
In reply to: gladeshunter 's message, "Re: Woods And Water, anyone read it Yet?" on 07/14/08 7:23:13pm

Gladeshunter,

I sorry but I have to disagree with you. I attended those meeting and can personal say that the meeting results were influenced by a few members of the workgroup. I'm sorry that the WMA's in the south and a few in the North Central have this problem but all WMA's don't and for those of us that don't have a problem we are going to be punished. I personally got sick for this group saying that the people that are complaining are the "GAMERS", that is not so, please tell me how eight or nine people can judge others. They don't know me or any of the others. You will still have the same problems with hording that you have now, that's one of the cheif complaints from the south region, those same people will still put in for there friends and familys. They never intended to trade them anyway. And the "Buddy Permit" idea was not in the first draft, is was added after the first round of Public Meetings because the Hunter was opposed. The Workgroup would say other ideas from the hunters pertaining to adding more hunts or doing away with a quota for example out of their realm of this group. Please tell me how adding a "Buddy Permit" is. The "Buddy Permit" come into the realm of the FWC Deer Mangement Team, they are the only ones that can dedided if an WMA can handle the added pressure. And as far as the workgroup not finding any other state with transferable permits, most others State only have permits for their "High Quality Areas" and they are non-transferable but all other areas are open to anyone. So this can not be used in Florida where almost all the WMA's are quota only hunts. And by the way Nick Wiley asked the Group at the last Quota Hunt Workshop to agree to try their idea of non-transferable next year on the "High Demand Areas", so that they would have an idea data as a result of the non-transferable permit, no-shows etc.. THIS WORKGROUP VOTED AGAINST IT!! Why if it is the only way to make sure there is fair and eqitable?
I do agree will some of what Chuck says. Nick did tell the group the FWC would pay for a survey of all hunters in the State. The group including one FWC voting member did vote against it. He's right about waiting in line for 5 to 6 years to get a permit. It was stated several times by Eddie White that there will be hardly any permits left after the first pass (of the first phase), why because the first draw is only for people with a preference point. You have to remember that along with the permits being non-transferable in the first phase, that if you don't get drawn with your perference you will be appointed a point for ever year you don't get a permit. Eddie did remind the workgroup several that the current third phase will become
the second phase of next years if this proposal gets passed. And please tell me how fair it is to change the second phase to include a person who only recieved one permit in the first phase, right now if you got drawn for a permit in the first phase you were not aloud to get another till the third phase. I like Chuck feel disappointed about the bias against non-transferable permits and publically voice my concern on the public comment section of the Quota Hunt Workshop Group web site, right after it started. Please remember several hunter groups were not represented on the group and decision were made to can the rules for them also.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]